-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Attempt on improving encoding in setuptools.tests #4261
Merged
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
2 tasks
2 tasks
The non-trivial changes in this PR (like refactoring involving |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary of changes
Improve encoding warnings in files inside the
setuptools/tests
directory.The following approaches were used:
encoding="utf-8"
open(..., "wb").close()
instead ofopen(..., "w").close()
when appropriatejaraco.path.build
instead ofPath.write_text
when appropriate.According to #4234 (review) the changes that use approach (1) should be uncontroversial. I also believe that changes that use approach (2) are very trivial and make sense (because the main objective is to "touch" the file). But this PR does include some less trivial refactoring when going for approach (3).
Working towards the approach discussed in #4234 (review)
Pull Request Checklist
newsfragments/
.(See documentation for details)